Farm bill extension left issues unresolved

Adam Nielsen, Illinois Farm Bureau’s director of national legislation and policy development, gives a national legislative update at the Illinois Agricultural Legislative Roundtable.

BLOOMINGTON, Ill. — One of the biggest shockers of the
“fiscal cliff” outcome was the farm bill’s one-year extension, according to the
Illinois Farm Bureau’s director of national legislation and policy development.

“It wasn’t the one-year extension or the short-term
extension that the House leadership had thrown together in the last week. It
wasn’t the extension that the Senate and the ag committees had agreed upon that
would go forward,” said Adam Nielsen.

“No, it was something that came out of the negotiations
between Sen. Mitch McConnell and Vice President Joe Biden. I don’t think it was
anything we anticipated, but we ended up with a one-year extension, getting
things that we didn’t want to get and not getting a lot that we did want to
see.”

Nielsen gave a national legislative update at the Illinois
Agricultural Legislative Roundtable hosted by IFB on Jan. 9.

The farm bill’s extension left more questions than
answers.

“There were a lot of authorizations, but no money in the
one-year extension, Nielsen said.

“There was a milk program that nobody wanted, particularly
Rep. (Collin) Peterson, who had spent a lot of time trying to bring everybody in
the industry together on a new milk program. That did not get passed, and we
have a little bit of the old coming forward.

“We’ll see direct payments. I think, looking back, it’s nice
to be able to say that was not something that we wanted to see in the farm bill,
particularly since a lot of the media questions that I get relate to the direct
payments and the extension of them.

“We can say we didn’t want them. We ended getting them. We
may not get them — there is still plenty of time for it to change, but we’ve got
to assume that they could be made here at the end of the year.”

Agriculture groups have been working with congressional
delegates for about a year and one-half to help develop a new farm bill that
include a deficit reduction, and Nielsen said he was hopeful that the
legislation was going to pass.

“I had a high amount of optimism that Congress would do the
right thing and get a five-year bill passed, so it was very, very disappointing
to not see that happen,” he said.

“But I think we can still hang our hat on the
deficit-reduction piece. That is still resonating very well. It certainly is
with news media. I think it will with the new Congress in both the House and the
Senate.”

The first “fiscal cliff” focused on the tax side, and the
next will aim at spending.

“They will be looking for programs that are ready-made to
provide savings, and, of course, the five-year farm bill should be at the top of
that list and that will be something we are talking about for the next few
months,” Nielsen said.

“It’s all about spending. It’s all about deficit reduction.
Congress will emerge from one crisis to the next. In the meantime, we will try
to fill in the blanks with some of the other issues we’ve been working
on.

“We will do whatever we can to offer up a five-year farm
bill as a potential savings, something that we can hang our hat on.

“In the meantime, just as a feared, more media attention is
being put on farm programs. We knew if the farm bill lingered into this year, it
wasn’t going to be any easier for us — it was going to be tougher.

“We don’t know how much money we are going to have to work
with. The Congressional Budget Office will come out with that number in the next
several weeks. We hope we can maintain our baseline, but in all likelihood it
will go down.

“We don’t know what we’re going to be wanting as part of
that five-year farm bill. I think that’s still up in the air and is something
that all of the groups need to discus as we go forward and what should be in
that bill. We know that it won’t be direct payments, but what will be
there.”

One farm bill issue that agriculture agrees with is crop
insurance.

“Crop insurance is vitally important. Crop insurance is the
No. 1 priority for the Illinois Farm Bureau, as I know it also is for other
associations, too,” Nielsen said.

Six new members have joined the Illinois legislative
delegation. In addition, a primary election will be held next month for another
seat representing the Chicago area.

“We’re going to try to work as hard as we can. We’re going
to try to bring our three new members of the House Agriculture Committee up to
speed on what we’ve asked for, what’s happened and why we’re where we’re at and
be there as resources for them as we move forward,” Nielsen said.

As many were gearing up to ring in the New Year, Nielsen was
closely monitoring developments on Capitol Hill and the looming “fiscal
cliff.”

“The Senate voted overwhelmingly to get the fiscal cliff
deal started in motion. I felt at the time that the vote was one-sided enough
and bipartisan enough that there would be no question that the House would
follow suit the next day,” he said.

On New Year’s Day, it was reported that the House was
considering an amendment to the legislation passed by the Senate.

“Of course, there was no Senate that would come back into
session. They had all gone home, fortunately, and so the House came to its
senses and passed the fiscal cliff deal. There some pros and some cons as part
of the legislation,” Nielsen said.

“It was great they were able to address the estate tax and
to help families be able to transfer assets from one generation to the next.
There was a lot of uncertainty headed toward New Year’s Eve and what this next
year would hold in terms of the estate tax and a lot of last-minute planning.

“Fortunately, we got some answers there. They say it is a
permanent deal, and we hope very much that it is a permanent deal.”